https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324863 Athmane Madjoudj <athmanem@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Athmane Madjoudj <athmanem@xxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Result: ======= APPROVED Issues: (Not blocker) ======= 1) You should package the latest version: 0.9.1 2) Patch varnish-modules-0.9.0-add_missing_TCP_CONGESTION_on_el5.patch should be upstreamed if possible 3) The license seems OK, since only build system is GPL. GPL (v2 or later) ----------------- varnish-modules-0.9.0/ltmain.sh MIT/X11 (BSD like) ------------------ varnish-modules-0.9.0/install-sh ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. .so are only used by varnish [-]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [-]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [-]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: needed for EPEL5 compatibility [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: Buildroot is not present Note: Needed for EPEL5 compatibility [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [?]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: varnish-modules-0.9.0-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm varnish-modules-debuginfo-0.9.0-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm varnish-modules-0.9.0-1.fc24.src.rpm varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vsthrottle -> vs throttle, vs-throttle, throttle varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US saintmode -> saint mode, saint-mode, sainthood varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US softpurge -> soft purge, soft-purge, Sourceforge varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tcp -> pct, tsp, tip varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xkey -> key, x key, Key varnish-modules.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) vmods -> mods, v mods, moods varnish-modules.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vmods -> mods, v mods, moods varnish-modules.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vsthrottle -> vs throttle, vs-throttle, throttle varnish-modules.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US saintmode -> saint mode, saint-mode, sainthood varnish-modules.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US softpurge -> soft purge, soft-purge, Sourceforge varnish-modules.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tcp -> pct, tsp, tip varnish-modules.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xkey -> key, x key, Key 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: varnish-modules-debuginfo-0.9.0-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vsthrottle -> vs throttle, vs-throttle, throttle varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US saintmode -> saint mode, saint-mode, sainthood varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US softpurge -> soft purge, soft-purge, Sourceforge varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tcp -> pct, tsp, tip varnish-modules.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xkey -> key, x key, Key 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Requires -------- varnish-modules-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): varnish-modules (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) varnish Provides -------- varnish-modules-debuginfo: varnish-modules-debuginfo varnish-modules-debuginfo(x86-64) varnish-modules: libvmod_cookie.so()(64bit) libvmod_header.so()(64bit) libvmod_saintmode.so()(64bit) libvmod_softpurge.so()(64bit) libvmod_tcp.so()(64bit) libvmod_var.so()(64bit) libvmod_vsthrottle.so()(64bit) libvmod_xkey.so()(64bit) varnish-modules varnish-modules(x86-64) Unversioned so-files -------------------- varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_cookie.so varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_header.so varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_saintmode.so varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_softpurge.so varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_tcp.so varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_var.so varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_vsthrottle.so varnish-modules: /usr/lib64/varnish/vmods/libvmod_xkey.so Source checksums ---------------- http://files.varnish-software.com/vmod/varnish-modules-0.9.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : c531708d05117dff36b885bad162f4faad231229369e2f5326fd4c07f78554ed CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c531708d05117dff36b885bad162f4faad231229369e2f5326fd4c07f78554ed -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx